Write an essay that summarizes Mike Rose’s “Blue Collar Brilliance” and then offers your own response. Make sure you accomplish both steps of this two-step process: first give an overview of what Rose writes in his essay, then point to at least one particular claim and engage with it in more detail. As you engage with Rose’s essay, you will have to choose your approach. You can agree with Rose by offering more examples that prove his point. You can disagree by offering counter examples or reasons that oppose his claims. You may simply ask questions or argue that the topic is more complex. There are other options, as well as any number of combinations. The response part of the essay is up to you, but it should take the argument by Rose and extend it in some way.

Mike Rose describes his first-hand experience of blue collar workers in his monograph “Blue Collar Brilliance”. Patiently, he observed the cooks and waitresses whilst he waited for his mother’s shift to end. He noticed how his mother called out abbreviated orders, tag tables and so on. Mike Rose describes how his mother, Rosie, took orders whilst holding cups of coffee and removed plates in motion. Rose observed how her mother and other waiters worked and concluded that blue collar work “demands both body and brain” (Rose 274). He describes that Rosie devised memory strategies and knew whether an order was being delayed. She was assiduous in sequencing and clustering her tasks and solved any technical or human problem simultaneously.

After describing his multi-talented and skilled uncle, Joe, Rose strives to provide generalised argumentation about how blue-collars apply knowledge, skills, and efficiency to their workspace. Mathematical and Verbal skills, Rose suggests, is applied regularly by blue-collars. In addition, Rose describes the academic education of his family over generations; remarking that only he finished high school and went to university. Later, he became a faculty member in a school of education after completing his graduate degree in education and cognitive psychology. Rose claims, “we also often ignore the experience of everyday work in administrative deliberations and policymaking” Contrary to Rose’s experience, I have observed the arduousness of white-collar workers. As a research assistant, I have observed the intricacies of white-collar work. I worked under a Professor Pratt, who was a doctorate in chemistry; his work encompassed.

He claims to relate his mother’s quick and effective decisions, customer interactions, memorisation and problem solving, and his uncle, Joe’s, learning, planning and management skills to that of a white-collar worker. “Preposterous”, some might argue. “You cannot possibly compare waiters and conductors with boffins.” However, the dichotomy between the blue-collars and white-collars are subtle. Regardless of Rose’s claim that blue-collar workers are more efficient and carry a broader skill set, there exists no comparison between the two categories. Granted, the social biases about one’s occupation are irrational; however, blue-collars cannot substitute white-collar workers merely because of their “diverse intelligence”. Given Rose’s experiences, he has colluded blue-collar intelligence with white-collar intelligence.

Hope This Helps!

i would think its c but i'm not sure

the correct answer is a "it describes nora and mrs. linde's relationship". opcions b and d are not related to the content of the passage in any way. option c could be appropiate but it does not fully capture the effect of the dialogue, while option a is quite appropiate, since the dialogue not only exemplifies the relationship between the characters, but it also captures the effect in the excerpt. we get to know that mrs linde bosses around and already knows nora.